IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/213003.html

Gaze bias differences capture individual choice behaviour

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas, Armin W.
  • Molter, Felix
  • Krajbich, Ian
  • Heekeren, Hauke R.
  • Mohr, Peter N. C.

Abstract

How do we make simple consumer choices (e.g., deciding between an apple, an orange, and a banana)? Recent empirical evidence suggests a close link between choice behavior and eye movements at the group level, with generally higher choice probabilities for items that were looked at longer during the decision process. However, it is unclear how variable this effect is across individuals. Here, we investigate this question in a multialternative forced-choice experiment using a novel computational model that can be easily applied to the individual participant level. We show that a link between gaze and choice is present for most individuals, but differs considerably in strength, namely, the choices of some individuals are almost independent of gaze allocation, while the choices of others are strongly associated with gaze behavior. Accounting for this variability in our model allows us to explain and accurately predict individual differences in observed choice behavior.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas, Armin W. & Molter, Felix & Krajbich, Ian & Heekeren, Hauke R. & Mohr, Peter N. C., 2019. "Gaze bias differences capture individual choice behaviour," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 3(6), pages 625-635.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:213003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/213003/1/Full-text-article-Thomas-et-al-Gaze-bias-differences.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. K. Carrie Armel & Aurelie Beaumel & Antonio Rangel, 2008. "Biasing simple choices by manipulating relative visual attention," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 3, pages 396-403, June.
    2. Avinash R. Vaidya & Lesley K. Fellows, 2015. "Testing necessary regional frontal contributions to value assessment and fixation-based updating," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 6(1), pages 1-12, December.
    3. Mohr, Peter N. C. & Heekeren, Hauke R. & Rieskamp, Jörg, 2017. "Attraction Effect in Risky Choice Can Be Explained by Subjective Distance Between Choice Alternatives," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 7, pages 1-10.
    4. repec:hum:wpaper:sfb649dp2010-063 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Frederick Callaway & Antonio Rangel & Thomas L Griffiths, 2021. "Fixation patterns in simple choice reflect optimal information sampling," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(3), pages 1-29, March.
    2. Moshe Glickman & Orian Sharoni & Dino J Levy & Ernst Niebur & Veit Stuphorn & Marius Usher, 2019. "The formation of preference in risky choice," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-25, August.
    3. Shen Li & Yuyang Zhang & Zhaolin Ren & Claire Liang & Na Li & Julie A. Shah, 2024. "Enhancing Preference-based Linear Bandits via Human Response Time," Papers 2409.05798, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2025.
    4. Fischbacher, Urs & Hausfeld, Jan & Renerte, Baiba, 2022. "Strategic incentives undermine gaze as a signal of prosocial motives," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 63-91.
    5. Bansal, Prateek & Kim, Eui-Jin & Ozdemir, Semra, 2024. "Discrete choice experiments with eye-tracking: How far we have come and ways forward," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    6. Adam Morris & Ryan W. Carlson & Hedy Kober & M. J. Crockett, 2025. "Introspective access to value-based multi-attribute choice processes," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 16(1), pages 1-15, December.
    7. Thomas O. Hancock & Stephane Hess & Charisma F. Choudhury, 2025. "Beyond utility: incorporating eye-tracking, skin conductance and heart rate data into cognitive and econometric travel behaviour models," Papers 2506.18068, arXiv.org.
    8. Zhao, Meina & Wang, Xuqi, 2021. "Perception value of product-service systems: Neural effects of service experience and customer knowledge," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stephanie M. Smith & Ian Krajbich & Ryan Webb, 2019. "Estimating the dynamic role of attention via random utility," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 5(1), pages 97-111, August.
    2. Molter, Felix & Thomas, Armin W. & Heekeren, Hauke R. & Mohr, Peter N. C., 2019. "GLAMbox: A Python toolbox for investigating the association between gaze allocation and decision behaviour," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 14(12), pages 1-23.
    3. Felix Molter & Armin W Thomas & Scott A Huettel & Hauke R Heekeren & Peter N C Mohr, 2022. "Gaze-dependent evidence accumulation predicts multi-alternative risky choice behaviour," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(7), pages 1-33, July.
    4. Zhi-Wei Li & Wei Ji Ma, 2021. "An uncertainty-based model of the effects of fixation on choice," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(8), pages 1-17, August.
    5. Kremena Valkanova, 2024. "Markov Stochastic Choice," Papers 2410.22001, arXiv.org.
    6. Vandenbroele, Jolien & Slabbinck, Hendrik & Van Kerckhove, Anneleen & Vermeir, Iris, 2021. "Mock meat in the butchery: Nudging consumers toward meat substitutes," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 105-116.
    7. Bauer, Jan M. & Aarestrup, Simon C. & Hansen, Pelle G. & Reisch, Lucia A., 2022. "Nudging more sustainable grocery purchases: Behavioural innovations in a supermarket setting," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    8. Devdeepta Bose & Henning Cordes & Sven Nolte & Judith Christiane Schneider & Colin Farrell Camerer, 2022. "Decision Weights for Experimental Asset Prices Based on Visual Salience," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 35(11), pages 5094-5126.
    9. Bogard, Jonathan E. & Reiff, Joseph S. & Caruso, Eugene M. & Hershfield, Hal E., 2024. "Social inferences from choice context: Dominated options can engender distrust," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    10. Xiaoling Zhang & Ke Zhang & Shibo Li & Damien Koenitz, 2023. "Effects of store fixture shape at retail checkout: Evidence from field and online studies," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(10), pages 3158-3173, October.
    11. Li, Feng & Du, Timon C. & Wei, Ying, 2020. "Enhancing supply chain decisions with consumers’ behavioral factors: An illustration of decoy effect," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    12. Alicia L. Rihn & Chengyan Yue, 2016. "Visual Attention's Influence on Consumers’ Willingness‐to‐Pay for Processed Food Products," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(3), pages 314-328, July.
    13. Fischbacher, Urs & Hausfeld, Jan & Renerte, Baiba, 2022. "Strategic incentives undermine gaze as a signal of prosocial motives," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 63-91.
    14. Frederick Callaway & Antonio Rangel & Thomas L Griffiths, 2021. "Fixation patterns in simple choice reflect optimal information sampling," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(3), pages 1-29, March.
    15. Nathaniel J. S. Ashby & Stephan Dickert & Andreas Glockner, 2012. "Focusing on what you own: Biased information uptake due to ownership," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 7(3), pages 254-267, May.
    16. Zuschke, Nick, 2020. "The impact of task complexity and task motivation on in-store marketing effectiveness: An eye tracking analysis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 337-350.
    17. Jacob L Orquin & Sonja Perkovic & Klaus G Grunert, 2018. "Visual Biases in Decision Making," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(4), pages 523-537, December.
    18. Fabian Herweg & Daniel Müller & Asri Özgümüs & Fabio Römeis, 2025. "Context-Dependent Risk Preferences and Decoy Effects," CESifo Working Paper Series 11611, CESifo.
    19. Ming Chen & Giuseppe M Ferro & Didier Sornette, 2022. "On the use of discrete-time quantum walks in decision theory," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(8), pages 1-32, August.
    20. Phillips, Aryn Z. & Rodriguez, Hector P., 2020. "U.S. county “food swamp” severity and hospitalization rates among adults with diabetes: A nonlinear relationship," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 249(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:213003. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.